Gonazales' Big Lie: "I Value Their Independence," Firings Not Political

Some self-helper, I can't remember who, wrote a book "Don't sweat the small stuff." Alberto Gonzales should have read it.

When it comes to credibility, I think this statement about the U.S. Attorney firings says it all:

"I value their independence, their professionalism, what they do in the community, and these decisions were not based on political reasons," Gonzales said.

Those of us who toil in the federal courts, particularly in criminal cases, know how it works. The job of U.S. Attorney is a political plum. It's awarded based on recommendations from the district's senators, it almost exclusively goes to a member of the President's party and very often it's based on the person's contributions, including fundraising efforts, to the successful presidential candidate.

That's the way the system has always worked for both parties. The position of U.S. Attorney is an administrative job -- very few of them actually try cases.

I haven't read anyone on either side of the aisle reporting differently. Alberto Gonzalez chose to pretend otherwise. I hope it sinks him.

Some of the new documents show the department’s acute awareness of individual United States attorney’s political and ideological views. An undated spreadsheet attached to a Feb. 12, 2007, e-mail message listed the federal prosecutors who had served under President Bush along with their past work experience.

The chart included a category for Republican Party and campaign work, showing who had been a delegate to a Republican convention or had managed a Republican political campaign. The chart had a separate category indicating who among the prosecutors was a member of the Federalist Society, a Washington-based association that serves as a talent pool for young conservatives seeking appointments in Republican administrations.

Taken together, Democrats asserted, the e-mail supported their contention that the ousted prosecutors were dismissed to make room for favored candidates who were chosen on the basis of their political qualifications as much as prosecutorial experience.

Had he just admitted it and acknowledged that the Administration wanted Republican and Bush loyalists who would support the Administration's criminal enforcement priorities to fill the position, provided they had the other qualifications, he'd be on firm ground. Instead, they are admitting this was the case only with the replacement of Arkansas U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins, who was fired to make way for Karl Rove's pal Tim Griffin.

Alberto Gonzales' representation that he values the independence of U.S. Attorneys and that the firings weren't political makes him a liar in my opinion. Independents don't get the job. And for lying about this, I think he deserves to lose his job.

Yes, once U.S. Attorneys are in office they are supposed to see that justice is done and put politics aside. But that's not what Gonzales said. He said the firing decisions were not based on political reasons. That's just hogwash.

". . .Those of us who toil in the federal courts, particularly in criminal cases, know how it works. The job of U.S. Attorney is a political plum. It's awarded based on recommendations from the district's senators, it almost exclusively goes to a member of the President's party and very often it's based on the person's contributions, including fundraising efforts, to the successful presidential candidate.

That's the way the system has always worked for both parties. The position of U.S. Attorney is an administrative job -- very few of them actually try cases. . ."

this is really first-rate. it is smart,
savvy, real-world, and from an experienced,
inside-the-courtroom-trial-lawyers' perspective.

one (at least i) just cannot find this
sort of perspective offered (almost)
anywhere at all, in the dead-tree media.

and, you are right -- i've seen no one make
the case for his departure more simply under-
standable to the non-lawyer, non-litigator,
other 99 percent of america watching this unfold.

i think it will. but i think it is also
wider, and now deeper, than just gonzales.

i am hopeful that a long line of questioning
at his hearing on tuesday follows what appears
to be endemic violations of the hatch act at
all levels of his department, the department
of justice.

then, i am hopeful that the wider, "five million
missing e-mails once on RNC servers" issue
leads to a series of hearings on violations of
the presidential records act, and perhaps a
reopened fitzgerald investigation of karl
rove and dick cheney -- and their actual,
as opposed to proffered, roles in the CIA leak case. . .

and so, i am hopeful. perhaps for
the first time in more than a year. .